put me back on the list of sporty owners. 2010 iron, 400 miles. got it from a local chiropractor who brought it home less than thirty days ago. his wife blew a head gasket over it and made him sell it to buy her a used five series bmw to make up for his grevious error. he got it from an older female first time rider who bought it new, took the h-d riders course, put 200 miles on it and never rode it again.

__________________
I only ride 'em. I don't know what makes 'em work.Oddball

After owning 92 2 wheelers of which 16 have been Sportsters I have to say this. If you want a beautiful bike that is economical and cheap to keep running you cannot beat a new Sportster. My Superlow has not presented any cornering clearance problems and will cruise effortlessly all day at 75 mph which is plenty fast enough for me. It also returns good mpg figures and has quite acceptable acceleration and a nice sized tank. I'm useing an Alaska Sheepskin folded double on the solo seat which not only sits me up higher but makes the seat quite comfortable. I've fit a NOS Shoei fairing with an extra tall Gustafsson shield and wind is practically non existant. There are many faster and better handling bikes but for me the Superlow is perfect.

That D700 takes nice pics, of course the subject helps. I wish my Rebel looked that good at ISO400! Of course, my wife is itching for us to get a 7D at some point... That should up the low light performance somewhat.

That D700 takes nice pics, of course the subject helps. I wish my Rebel looked that good at ISO400! Of course, my wife is itching for us to get a 7D at some point... That should up the low light performance somewhat.

Personally I wouldn't buy a 7D for low light performance. It's good for a lot of other things (focus and body build come to mind). I don't think the noise is much better than the previous generation of aps-c sized sensors.

Canon is about due for some new intros. At the least a 5DIII should bring the prices of the 5DII down, which is a lot better low-light wise.

You know, right after I typed that above I looked into the cameras a little bit to see where the prices are at now, and noticed from a few different reviews that the low light performance of the 7D is not that much better than my Rebel 400D. Too bad considering the price difference.

My wife and I realized that most of our pictures that we hold value to are of family, and mostly indoors, so the next camera we are making sure has excellent low light performance. There are so many options today that it just makes plain sense to do the research on the cameras, and on your shooting style, to make sure you get the right one.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robert OK

Personally I wouldn't buy a 7D for low light performance. It's good for a lot of other things (focus and body build come to mind). I don't think the noise is much better than the previous generation of aps-c sized sensors.

Canon is about due for some new intros. At the least a 5DIII should bring the prices of the 5DII down, which is a lot better low-light wise.